When I first started writing about strata I came across a story about a residential village plan in the USA which was open to anyone … except lawyers. The developer reckoned that most people just get on with their lives and sort out their problems when they have them. But some lawyers’ knee-jerk response to any issues was to litigate, he said, or at least threaten to do so. Now this is a huge over-generalization (pace, all my lawyer friends) but we know there are some out there who, as I’ve said in the past, should wear tee-shirts with “LAWYER” on the front, to save them starting every discussion with a reminder of what they do for a living.
Predicatably, perhaps inevitably, the US developer was sued for discriminations by a lawyer
who didn’t even want to buy into the village. Apparently, the developer’s defence was: “See what I mean?”
I was reminded of this last week when I was asked to comment on radio about the A Current Affair exposé of an apartment building in Brisbane that doesn’t allow families with kids – or even pregnant women – to buy into it.
According to their story, the Heritage listed company title Glenfalloch building in Brisbane’s New Farm area is populated entirely by young urban professionals and retirees.
There was much shock and horror on the ACA track, with lawyers saying this was discriminatory and illegal – which seems to be the case under federal Age Discrimination laws. In fact, it’s very much a “small war, not many dead” and I don’t see anybody going to jail over it nor, indeed, an influx of mewling and puking infants, to misquote the Bard.
But it got me thinking. Strata law in NSW clearly says you can’t have by-laws that ban children. Federal law says you can’t discriminate on the basis of age, sex, religion or ethnicity.
But what about some positive discrimination? What if you set up a building for young professionals that suited their lifestyles (which wouldn’t involve being woken on a two-hourly basis by next-door’s latest contribution to overpopulation)? Isn’t our democracy strong enough for us to be able to make choices about the way we live and who we want to live next to?
Would a gay-only building be such a bad thing? How about one that was predominantly Korean or Vietnamese … or Irish … or single women? If this only applied to new buildings and everything was open and above board right from the start, could anyone really claim they were being discriminated against? (I know they could, and some would, but what would be the point?)
Everyone would know what was involved from the get-go. You put up your development proposal and you say, for instance, this building will be for pet owners. People without pets will not be allowed to buy or rent in the building. And then you include facilities like pet playgrounds and cat litter recycling and pets are allowed to wander on common property. And, the important thing is, you don’t get a bunch of opportunist empty-nesters or ‘me-first’ trust fund brats moving in and changing the rules to suit their lifestyles.
Just to give an example. An Anglo-Lebanese woman I know moved into an apartment block in one of the newer areas of Sydney, simply because the unit was the best she could afford. She soon discovered that most of her neighbours were from the same South-East Asian ethnic group.
They would come home from work, dump their stuff in their home, make a cup of tea and then come back out into their lift lobbies and corridors to drink it and enjoy a chat with their neighbours. This was their culture at work and they loved the sense of community they had. The problem was they were having it in the corridors, rather than inside their homes. Our friend, however was not so keen, and ended up moving out because of the constant chatter and laughter outside her door.
Now, she wasn’t the kind of person to start making everyone else conform to her lifestyle (which she theoretically could have done, by getting orders at the CTTT). But wouldn’t it have been a lot easier on her if there had been some way of her knowing not to buy there in the first place.
I love the multicultural aspects of Australia and I enjoy the enthnic diversity of our cities. And I also think that everyone should have to opportunity to live how they please without upsetting other people or having to conform to the arbitrary standards of behavior set by their ‘squeaky wheel’ neighbours.
More discrimination, not less, I say! And maybe somebody will build a block for grumpy old people … oh, they already do – and it’s perfectly legal.
You’ll find a link to the Current Affair story HERE. And you can read my column about the Brisbane building HERE. May 21, 2013
NB: There are considerable differences in strata law between NSW and other states and countries. There have also been changes in the law since some of the articles archived on this website were written. If you have a serious problem, contact the agencies listed in our contacts sections. Otherwise contact a properly qualified and experienced strata lawyer or strata manager. These columns offer general opinions and should not be regarded as a substitute for professional legal advice. Jimmy Thomson, 2013